Abstract
Early in 2010, lions killed four people and over a hundred livestock in
Mbire district, northern Zimbabwe, an area bordering a complex of protected
wildlife areas of global conservation importance. The events
prompted a local outcry, prominent media coverage, and even calls
for the translocation of people to safer areas (The Herald 11.1.2010, 23.1.10, 27.3.2010,
ZimEye.org 17.1.10, 22.1.10). Government agencies
also responded to this apparent human–wildlife conflict. The Mbire
Rural District Council (RDC), the local authority in wildlife management,
shot ten lions and lifted a moratorium on the hunting of female
lions. The central government’s Parks and Wildlife Management
Authority (ZimParks) more than doubled the RDC’s annual lion
hunting quota. But unlike these government bodies, local people did
not see the attacks only as a human–wildlife conflict. For them, the
lion attacks were also meaningful in a different way, signifying a political
problem of a much larger magnitude. As local government in Mbire is
highly dependent on wildlife exploitation, they did not see the lion
attacks independently of the changing governance arrangements in
Mbire district.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 93-120 |
Journal | The Journal of Modern African Studies |
Volume | 53 |
Issue number | 01 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2015 |
Keywords
- natural-resource management
- indirect rule
- land
- campfire
- politics
- africa
- conservation
- tradition
- livestock
- botswana